1.
Strongly disagree (1)
2.
Disagree a little (2)
3.
Neither agree or disagree (3)
4.
Agree a little (4)
5.
Strongly agree (5) The Internet is a
convenient way
of shopping
o o o o o
The Internet is
often frustrating
o o o o o
Shopping over the Internet is a pleasant
experience
o o o o o
I'd rather have no human contact and buy
from home
o o o o o
I don't like being disturbed and/or distracted by others when shopping (store maids or even other customers)
o o o o o
I would rather buy at store than
wait for delivery
o o o o o
I like being surrounded by people when
shopping
o o o o o
I like to shop where people
know me
o o o o o
I prefer shopping with company (friends,
family...)
o o o o o
I like when store
maids help me
o o o o o
While shopping on the Internet, I miss the
experience of interacting with people
o o o o o
I like browsing for the social
experience
o o o o o
I am cautious in trying new
products
o o o o o
I enjoy exploring alternative
stores
o o o o o
Investigating new stores is generally a waste
of time
o o o o o
I like to try new products and
brands for fun
o o o o o
---
Q22 - Here are a number of characteristics that may or may not apply to you. For example, do you agree that you are someone who likes to spend time with others?
Please choose from 1 (Strongly disagree) and 5 (Strongly agree) in each statement to indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with that statement.
I see myself as someone who...
1.
Strongly disagree
2.
Disagree a little
3.
Neither agree or disagree
4.
Agree a little
5.
Strongly agree is talkative
o o o o o
is reserved
o o o o o
is full of
energy
o o o o o
generates a lot of
enthusiasm
o o o o o
tends to be
quiet
o o o o o
has an assertive
personality
o o o o o
is sometimes
shy, inhibited
o o o o o
is outgoing,
sociable
o o o o o
2BFI scale scoring (“R” denotes reverse-scored items):
Extraversion: 1, 2R, 3, 4, 5R, 6, 7R, 8.
---
Q3 - In which state do you currently live in?
▼ Alabama (1) ... I do not reside in the United States (53)
Q4 - How big is the settlement where you live? Considering the population of the city
o
Less than 5ko
5k - 40ko
40k - 70ko
70k - 100ko
100k - 250ko
200k - 500ko
500k - 1Mo
More than 1MQ5 - In which state did you spend most of your lockdown days?
▼ Alabama (1) ... I do not reside in the United States (53)
Q6 - How big is the settlement where you spent most of your lockdown days?
Considering the population of the city
o
Less than 5ko
5k - 40ko
40k - 70ko
70k - 100ko
100k - 250ko
200k - 500ko
500k - 1Mo
More than 1MQ7 - Considering the state you spent most of your time during quarantine, how do you evaluate the strictness of your lockdown in these situations?
1. With no social restrictions
2. With some social restrictions only during critical days
3. Super strict, with no connections during several months
In your professional life
o o o
In your family meetings (family
that doesn't live with you)
o o o
In friends social events
o o o
Going out or going to
restaurants
o o o
Going to grocery stores
o o o
Going to do some retail
shopping
o o o
Traveling between US states
o o o
Traveling to other countries
o o o
---
Q8 - Considering these actual times after covid-19 lockdown, how do you position your consumer experience preferences?
Online Shopping In store shopping -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Q9 - Gender
o
Maleo
Femaleo
Non-binary / third gendero
Prefer not to say Q10 - Age________________________________________________________________
Q11 - Education
o
Less than high schoolo
High school graduate or equivalento
Some college, no degreeo
College graduateo
PostgraduateAppendix B. Summary of Measurement Item
Appendix C. Loadings and Reliability Analysis
Appendix D. One-way ANOVA (Test 1)
Descriptives
N Mean Std.
Deviation Std.
Error
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Minimum Maximum Lower
Bound Upper Bound
IPS1_1 0 44 1,66 0,888 0,134 1,39 1,93 1 5
1 98 1,96 0,785 0,079 1,80 2,12 1 5
Total 142 1,87 0,827 0,069 1,73 2,00 1 5
IPS1_2 0 44 3,09 1,217 0,183 2,72 3,46 1 5
1 98 3,71 1,210 0,122 3,47 3,96 1 5
Total 142 3,52 1,242 0,104 3,32 3,73 1 5
IPS1_3 0 44 2,11 0,868 0,131 1,85 2,38 1 4
1 98 2,02 0,786 0,079 1,86 2,18 1 5
Total 142 2,05 0,811 0,068 1,91 2,18 1 5
IPS1_4 0 44 3,27 1,208 0,182 2,91 3,64 1 5
1 98 3,54 1,177 0,119 3,30 3,78 1 5
Total 142 3,46 1,189 0,100 3,26 3,65 1 5
IPS1_5 0 44 3,20 1,153 0,174 2,85 3,56 1 5
1 98 3,60 1,216 0,123 3,36 3,85 1 5
Total 142 3,48 1,207 0,101 3,28 3,68 1 5
ANOVA
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
IPS1_1 Between Groups 2,735 1 2,735 4,085 0,045
Within Groups 93,723 140 0,669
Total 96,458 141
IPS1_2 Between Groups 11,800 1 11,800 8,034 0,005
Within Groups 205,636 140 1,469
Total 217,437 141
IPS1_3 Between Groups 0,264 1 0,264 0,400 0,528
Within Groups 92,391 140 0,660
Total 92,655 141
IPS1_4 Between Groups 2,182 1 2,182 1,550 0,215
Within Groups 197,064 140 1,408
Total 199,246 141
IPS1_5 Between Groups 4,798 1 4,798 3,348 0,069
Within Groups 200,639 140 1,433
Total 205,437 141
Appendix E. One-way ANOVA (Test 2)
Descriptives
N Mean Std.
Deviation Std.
Error
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Minimum Maximum Lower Bound Upper Bound
IPS_composite 0 44 3,189 0,833 0,126 2,94 3,44 1 4,67
1 98 3,619 0,956 0,097 3,43 3,81 1 5,00
Total 142 3,485 0,938 0,079 3,33 3,64 1 5,00
ANOVA
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
IPS_composite Between Groups 5,606 1 5,606 6,621 0,011
Within Groups 118,533 140 0,847
Total 124,138 141
Appendix F. One-way ANOVA (Test 3)
Descriptives
N Mean Std.
Deviation Std.
Error
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Minimum Maximum Lower Bound Upper
Bound
IPS8_6 0 44 1,59 5,559 0,838 -0,10 3,28 -10 10
1 98 1,60 6,332 0,640 0,33 2,87 -10 10
Total 142 1,60 6,083 0,511 0,59 2,61 -10 10
ANOVA
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
IPS8_6 Between Groups 0,004 1 0,004 0,000 0,992
Within Groups 5218,116 140 37,272
Total 5218,120 141
Appendix G. One-way ANOVA (Test 4)
Descriptives
N Mean Std.
Deviation Std.
Error
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Minimum Maximum Lower Bound Upper
Bound
NSC 0 44 2,95 0,771 0,116 2,72 3,19 1,00 4,14
1 98 3,17 0,735 0,074 3,03 3,32 1,00 4,43
Total 142 3,11 0,751 0,063 2,98 3,23 1,00 4,43
ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
NSC Between Groups 1,494 1 1,494 2,684 0,104
Within Groups 77,942 140 0,557
Total 79,436 141
Appendix H. Mediation Analysis
Purpose of the mediation analysis: Examine whether purchase intentions in physical stores can be explained by the need for social connections. The SPSS macro developed by Hayes (2017) was used to test these effects.
Model : 4 Y : IPS8_6 X : SL_state M : NSC_agr Sample
Size: 142
***********************************************************************
***
OUTCOME VARIABLE:
NSC_agr
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,1372 ,0188 ,5567 2,6843 1,0000 140,0000 ,1036 Model
coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 2,9545 ,1125 26,2661 ,0000 2,7322 3,1769 SL_state ,2218 ,1354 1,6384 ,1036 -,0459 ,4895
***********************************************************************
***
OUTCOME VARIABLE:
IPS8_6
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,4262 ,1816 30,7228 15,4227 2,0000 139,0000 ,0000 Model
coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant -8,7113 2,0345 -4,2818 ,0000 -12,7338 -4,6887 SL_state -,7624 1,0155 -,7508 ,4540 -2,7701 1,2453 NSC_agr 3,4869 ,6278 5,5539 ,0000 2,2456 4,7282
************** TOTAL, DIRECT, AND INDIRECT EFFECTS OF X ON Y **************
Total effect of X on Y
Effect se t p LLCI ULCI
,0111 1,1079 ,0100 ,9920 -2,1792 2,2015 Direct effect of X on Y
Effect se t p LLCI ULCI
-,7624 1,0155 -,7508 ,4540 -2,7701 1,2453 Indirect effect(s) of X on Y:
Effect BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI NSC_agr ,7735 ,4938 -,1641 1,7690
Appendix I. Moderation Analysis (Test 1)
Purpose of the moderation analysis: Examine if a moderator describes the level of changes between independent and dependent variables. The SPSS macro developed by Hayes (2017) was used to test these effects.
Model : 1 Y : IPS8_6 X : SL_state W : E_agg Sample Size: 142
**************************************************************************
OUTCOME VARIABLE:
IPS8_6
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,2837 ,0805 34,7682 4,0278 3,0000 138,0000 ,0088 Model
coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 1,7093 ,8988 1,9018 ,0593 -,0679 3,4865 SL_state -,2468 1,0790 -,2287 ,8194 -2,3804 1,8868 E_agg 1,1894 1,3349 ,8910 ,3745 -1,4502 3,8290 Int_1 1,9318 1,6263 1,1878 ,2369 -1,2839 5,1476 Product terms key:
Int_1 : SL_state x E_agg
Test(s) of highest order unconditional interaction(s):
R2-chng F df1 df2 p
X*W ,0094 1,4110 1,0000 138,0000 ,2369 ---
Focal predict: SL_state (X) Mod var: E_agg (W)
Conditional effects of the focal predictor at values of the moderator(s):
E_agg Effect se t p LLCI ULCI
-,6547 -1,5115 1,4547 -1,0390 ,3006 -4,3879 1,3649 ,0000 -,2468 1,0790 -,2287 ,8194 -2,3804 1,8868 ,6547 1,0179 1,5747 ,6464 ,5191 -2,0958 4,1317
Appendix L. Moderation Analysis (Test 2)
Purpose of the moderation analysis: Examine if a moderator describes the level of changes between independent and dependent variables. The SPSS macro developed by Hayes (2017) was used to test these effects.
Model : 1 Y : NSC_agr X : SL_state W : E_agg Sample Size: 142
***********************************************************************
***
OUTCOME VARIABLE:
NSC_agr
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,4764 ,2269 ,4450 13,5038 3,0000 138,0000 ,0000 Model
coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 1,6399 ,4750 3,4524 ,0007 ,7007 2,5791 SL_state -,2890 ,5870 -,4923 ,6233 -1,4496 ,8717 E_agg ,4277 ,1510 2,8319 ,0053 ,1291 ,7263 Int_1 ,1396 ,1840 ,7585 ,4495 -,2243 ,5034 Product terms key:
Int_1 : SL_state x E_agg
Test(s) of highest order unconditional interaction(s):
R2-chng F df1 df2 p
X*W ,0032 ,5753 1,0000 138,0000 ,4495 ---
Focal predict: SL_state (X) Mod var: E_agg (W)
Conditional effects of the focal predictor at values of the moderator(s):
E_agg Effect se t p LLCI ULCI
2,5187 ,0625 ,1646 ,3800 ,7045 -,2629 ,3880 3,1734 ,1539 ,1221 1,2608 ,2095 -,0875 ,3953 3,8281 ,2453 ,1782 1,3768 ,1708 -,1070 ,5975